JUNIA HONORED
In Romans 16:7 (NIV), Paul writes:
Greet Andronicus and Junia, my fellow Jews who have been in prison with me. They are outstanding among the apostles, and they were in Christ before I was.
Andronicus is a man, Junia a woman. Paul honors them as outstanding apostles.
We learn more about them from John Chrysostom, one of the best-known early commentators on Scripture, who was Archbishop of Constantinople around 400 AD. He reads Paul’s Greek as a native speaker. In his homily on this part of the letter to the Romans, he is impressed by the praise which Paul gives them, as being outstanding apostles, especially since Junia is a woman. From his knowledge of them, he explains the reason: it is because of “their works, their achievements”. Traditions preserved in the Orthodox churches tell us that, like Paul himself, they converted many to Christ, healed people and drove out demons, founded churches, and finally suffered martyrdom.
Chrysostom was a man of his time, firmly patriarchal. He believed that women were not competent to lead. Only men should lead, both in civil society and in the Church. Since that was his belief, we can be confident that he was not deliberately, or even accidentally, promoting Junia above her station. Through Church history, there are many examples of women being incorrectly demoted or written out – in texts, translations, lists and commentaries. But examples of women being incorrectly promoted are as rare as hen’s teeth.
Chrysostom held his patriarchal view with great confidence. The existence of a woman apostle did not trouble him. He did not regard prominent New Testament women as relevant to the leadership of the Church in his own day. He regarded them as inspiring and anomalous exceptions. He honored Junia.
JUNIA’S SEX DENIED
But some other writers were less knowledgeable or less confident. How could a woman be an apostle? Wouldn’t that be improper, even impossible?
So, some lists of the early disciples turned her into a man named Junias.
The first time a Bible commentary turned her into a man was around the year 1300: that was by Giles of Rome, a Latin speaker, who was probably unable to read Paul’s original Greek. Then, in the sixteenth century, Luther turned her into a man in his influential German translation of the Bible.
The heyday of Junia’s sex reassignment as Junias was in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. Even respected English Bible versions fell into this error, such as the RSV (1946) and the NIV (1973).
We can be confident it was an error – and not only because Chrysostom knew who Junia was and what she did. More than that, the male name ‘Junias’ did not exist when Paul wrote. There is no known example of that name from Greco-Roman antiquity. It only came into existence later, and only as a corruption of Junia’s name in Romans 16:7. In contrast, in and around Paul’s time, the female name ‘Junia’ was well-known in Rome. It is attested by hundreds of examples.
Over the last fifty years, after much debate, scholars have reaffirmed that Junia was a woman. The mistranslation ‘Junias’ now persists in only a small minority of recent English versions.
JUNIA’S APOSTLESHIP REJECTED
The denials of Junia’s sex have faded. But there is another way of rejecting her apostleship: reinterpret Paul’s words to exclude her from being an apostle.
In some modern Bible versions, such as the ESV and the NET, Andronicus and Junia are no longer outstanding among the apostles. Instead, they are ‘well known to the apostles’.
This exclusionary reinterpretation does not sit well in the context. Paul is commending Andronicus and Junia by referring to their track record, ascribing honor to them. But to be well known to the apostles would not be an ascription of honor. After Judas Iscariot defected, he remained ‘well known to the apostles’.
The reinterpretation is based largely on an academic article written in 2001, which argued that Paul’s Greek words had been misunderstood. But the article is full of errors. Its conclusion on how to translate Paul’s words does not follow from the evidence which it discusses. This has been pointed out by scholars on all sides of the debate over women in ministry.
As far as I have been able to discover, in the whole history of the Church, no native Greek-speaking scholar has ever understood Paul’s Greek words in a way which excludes Junia from being an apostle.
Even if we include scholars who learned Greek as a second language, the picture is that for 1,500 years after Paul wrote his letter, no one thought of taking Paul’s words to mean that Andronicus and Junia were not themselves apostles – even as a possibility.
So, versions like the ESV are asking us to believe a highly improbable scenario:
- For 1,500 years, commentators familiar with Greek incompetently failed to see the exclusionary meaning of what Paul wrote, even as a possibility. Instead, they misunderstood him as definitely commending Junia as an apostle.
- This happened even though those commentators included educated native Greek speakers in the early centuries after Paul who were very familiar with the Greek of the New Testament and with the Greek language as a whole.
- This happened even though those commentators were dismissive of women’s leadership, so that they would instinctively have read Paul’s words in an exclusionary sense if the literary and historical context had allowed them to do so.
- When Chrysostom spoke of the pair as outstanding among the apostles because of their achievements, he was merely speculating, flying a kite – he did not really have independent information about them.
Such a counter-cultural, universal and long-enduring failure by commentators is very unlikely. That Chrysostom presented mere speculation as if it were fact is very unlikely. The rejection of Junia’s apostleship in certain modern versions of the Bible is unjustified. We can be confident that Chrysostom and many others were justified in recognizing Junia as an apostle.
JUNIA REDISCOVERED: WHAT KIND OF APOSTLE?
So, if Junia was a woman apostle, what kind of apostle was she?
Certainly, she and Andronicus were not among the original Twelve. What other kinds of apostles do we see in the New Testament?
On a few occasions, Paul uses the word ‘apostle’ to mean a messenger or courier, sent by a church on a one-off errand, such as delivering a financial gift (see 2 Cor. 8:23; Phil. 2:25). That meaning does not fit here. The couriers were not a known group, among whom Andronicus and Junia could be outstanding. Nor does it fit with what Chrysostom and others knew about this pair.
There is only one other possibility, consistent with New Testament usage: they were pioneering apostles like Barnabas and Silas. For this sense, see Acts 14:14 and 1 Corinthians 9:6.
The task which Jesus gave to the Eleven in Acts 1:8 was to be Spirit-empowered witnesses from Jerusalem to the ends of the earth. After Pentecost, God added more people for spearheading that task, by giving more gifts of pioneering apostleship. In line with Peter’s declaration on the day of Pentecost, God’s gifts were not restricted to men (Acts 2:17–18).
We may compare what Paul says about the imposters at Corinth who falsely claimed to be ‘apostles of Christ’ (see 2 Cor. 11:13). We can be sure that the imposters were not claiming to be members of the Twelve, since no one would have believed them. We can be equally sure that those boastful imposters were not claiming to fulfil the humble task of couriers (see 11:12). The imposters must have been claiming to be among the pioneering apostles. That was the sense in which Paul gave the title ‘apostle’ to Junia and Andronicus.
If Andronicus and Junia were pioneering apostles, that explains why they had been imprisoned with Paul, as Silas also had been. It was unusual for a woman to be imprisoned. We may infer that she publicly preached the good news and upset powerful people by doing so.
In prisons, women were not separated from men. Physical and sexual assault were a constant risk. Suffering is a mark of a true apostle (1 Cor. 4:9–11; 2 Cor. 11). Junia and Andronicus were undeterred.
Historic commentaries confirmed that Junia and Andronicus were pioneering apostles who were distinguished by their achievements.
In the fifth century, Theodoret explained they were ‘outstanding not just among the disciples but among the teachers, and not just among the common teachers but among the apostles’.
In the fourteenth century, Nicholas of Lyra said they were prominent among the apostles and referred to their ‘meritorious preaching’.
In the sixteenth century, Peter Vermigli referred to their reputation for having spread the gospel through many places and having built up a good number of churches.
Calvin took much the same view, describing them as apostles in the sense of people who planted churches by carrying here and there the doctrine of salvation.
Some have proposed that Junia’s ministry was confined to working among women. This is imagined as a product of cultural pressures which restricted women’s participation in public life. But in reality, first-century women in Greek and Roman settings were not secluded in the way that elite, male, Greco-Roman moralists said that they ought to be. Instead, they took part in public and commercial life. This is shown by a wealth of evidence. To the annoyance of moralists, women worked in public with men in many ways, including as magistrates, priestesses, skilled professionals, and business people – from shopkeepers to shipyard owners. So, the prevailing culture did not require that Junia’s ministry be to women only. Such a restriction would also be contrary to what is known about her.
The function of pioneering apostles raises a question about spiritual authority.
In 1 Corinthians 12:28–31, Paul encourages the Corinthians to earnestly desire the ‘higher’ gifts of apostles, prophets, and teachers. He is addressing both men and women. Among these higher gifts, he describes apostles as ‘first’. In the context of Paul’s letter, this reference to apostles cannot be to the primary Twelve, nor to couriers. It must be to the gifts of pioneering apostles.
One might expect the spiritual authority of pioneering apostles to extend to appointing elders in the churches which they build up. That is exactly what we see in Acts 14:23. It would be irrational to regard them as having less authority or less liberty to teach than the local elders.
Remembering that the original twelve apostles were all men, Paul’s commendation of Junia is significant. After Pentecost, God’s calling and gifts of apostleship were not limited to men. Paul’s commendation of Junia is not consistent with a rule reserving spiritual and teaching authority in the Church exclusively to men.
Junia the woman apostle has been rediscovered.
There are pioneering women apostles in subsequent church history. Early in the fourth century, the woman apostle Nino took the gospel to Iberia (modern-day Georgia) and is credited with turning that nation from paganism to Christian faith. Still in the present day, women respond to God’s call to be pioneers, and for the sake of Christ they endure imprisonment as Junia did.
We do not deny or reject Junia the apostle. We do not deny or reject her female successors. Instead, we honor them all.
Explore Further
- For a free resource which discusses Junia and the 2001 article which argued for her to be “well known to the apostles” click here.
- Bartlett, True Complementarity: The Way of Christ for Men and Women (2026) has three chapters surveying in more detail the Biblical, traditional and scholarly evidence concerning Junia.